Analyzing mills saying - Essay Example

Full Mill on Morality Morality is based on a lot of things. For some, they are based on what is observed to be good and widely accepted. Morality can also be defined by what is considered taboo, those which are despised and unacceptable in the community. According to Jeremy Bentham’s principle of utility, anything that produces pleasure but not pain or any negative consequence, is considered moral. Therefore, whatever action or decision that a person undertakes can be considered good as long as it produces happiness.

On the other hand, John Stuart Mill believes that “It is better to be human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied, better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied”. From the aforementioned statement, the English philosopher suggests that happiness or satisfaction is not the ultimate objective of performing an action or making a decision. This means that he does not quite agree to the principle of utility because he maintains that there would be a difference in the kinds of such individual.

Meaning, a thing might be good, acceptable and brings happiness to someone but not to another. For the first person may be happy however, when someone looks deeper into what the former is satisfied about, it could be because that person’s standards are way below what his humanity demands of him. For example, one may find pleasure in sex but another finds it displeasing because the person acts immorally. That certain person acts like an animal which simply satisfies his wants. For Mill, he is likened to a pig.

It is known that a pig does nothing but eat, sleep and relieves itself from the heat by swimming in the mud or worse, in its own dirt and it is satisfied with such kind of life. Therefore, the philosopher argues that he would rather be an unhappy human being than an animal which acts in such a manner but is still satisfied about itself. For the second person, he might be dissatisfied and unhappy but considers himself of higher morality than the former. This contradicts the philosophy of Bentham who says that a person is moral when his actions bring him happiness.

Similarly, Mill believes that it is better to be a dissatisfied wise man than a satisfied fool. It is assumed that he argues that when a wise man is unhappy or dissatisfied about his actions or decisions, it is not only because he has done unacceptable things. Rather, the unhappiness and dissatisfaction might be the result of unmet high standard one has set for himself to achieve. In the same way, one cannot say that a person who is satisfied and happy with his foolishness did a good thing. A foll might think he has done something excellent but in the eyes of other people, his actions are not even considered good because he is nothing but a fool who does not know how to act better.

Mill goes on to explain also that if the pig and the fool disagree with each other, it does not mean that one is of higher morality or understanding than the other. He considers them of the same level but focused on their side of the matter only that is why they have disagreements. A pig looks at the bottom of the issue and thinks it is right while the fool looks at the left side of the issue and believes he is correct. However, the human being, the wise man who looks at them judge them both to be wrong.

This is because the wise man sees the many faces of the issue and meditates on them, while the other two look at just one aspect and are satisfied with the little that they know.